On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 12:00 AM, Pat Haugen
wrote:
> On 09/25/2015 11:51 PM, Ajit Kumar Agarwal wrote:
>>
>> I have made the following changes in the estimate_reg_pressure_cost
>> function used
>> by the loop invariant and IVOPTS.
>>
>> Earlier the estimate_reg_pressure cost uses the cost of n_ne
On 09/25/2015 11:51 PM, Ajit Kumar Agarwal wrote:
I have made the following changes in the estimate_reg_pressure_cost function
used
by the loop invariant and IVOPTS.
Earlier the estimate_reg_pressure cost uses the cost of n_new variables that
are generated by the Loop Invariant
and IVOPTS. T
rks ( 4668.743 vs 4778.741)
>
> Code size reduction with respect to FP SPEC CPU 2000 benchmarks
>
> Number of instruction with optimization = 1094117 Number of
> instruction without optimization = 1094659
>
> Reduction in number of instruction with the optim
with the optimization vs ratio without optimization for INT benchmarks
>> (3807.632 vs 3804.661)
>>
>> ratio with the optimization vs ratio without optimization for FP benchmarks
>> ( 4668.743 vs 4778.741)
>>
>> Code size reduction with respect to FP SPEC CPU 2000
vs 4778.741)
>
> Code size reduction with respect to FP SPEC CPU 2000 benchmarks
>
> Number of instruction with optimization = 1094117
> Number of instruction without optimization = 1094659
>
> Reduction in number of instruction with the optimization = 542 instruction.
>
&
c: GCC Patches; Vinod Kathail; Shail Aditya Gupta; Vidhumouli
> Hunsigida; Nagaraju Mekala
> Subject: Re: [Patch,optimization]: Optimized changes in the estimate register
> pressure cost.
>
> On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 04:51:20AM +, Ajit Kumar Agarwal wrote:
>> SPEC CPU 2000
tya Gupta; Vidhumouli Hunsigida;
> Nagaraju Mekala
> Subject: Re: [Patch,optimization]: Optimized changes in the estimate register
> pressure cost.
>
> On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 04:51:20AM +, Ajit Kumar Agarwal wrote:
>> SPEC CPU 2000 benchmarks are run and there is following
tya Gupta; Vidhumouli
>Hunsigida; Nagaraju Mekala
>Subject: Re: [Patch,optimization]: Optimized changes in the estimate
>register pressure cost.
>
>On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 04:51:20AM +, Ajit Kumar Agarwal wrote:
>> SPEC CPU 2000 benchmarks are run and there is following im
On September 26, 2015 9:10:13 AM GMT+02:00, "Bin.Cheng"
wrote:
>On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Ajit Kumar Agarwal
> wrote:
>> SPEC CPU 2000 benchmarks are run and there is following impact on the
>performance
>> and code size.
>>
>> ratio with the optimization vs ratio without optimization fo
in the estimate register
pressure cost.
On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 04:51:20AM +, Ajit Kumar Agarwal wrote:
> SPEC CPU 2000 benchmarks are run and there is following impact on the
> performance and code size.
>
> ratio with the optimization vs ratio without optimization for INT
On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 04:51:20AM +, Ajit Kumar Agarwal wrote:
> SPEC CPU 2000 benchmarks are run and there is following impact on the
> performance
> and code size.
>
> ratio with the optimization vs ratio without optimization for INT benchmarks
> (3807.632 vs 3804.661)
>
> ratio with the
741)
>
> Code size reduction with respect to FP SPEC CPU 2000 benchmarks
>
> Number of instruction with optimization = 1094117
> Number of instruction without optimization = 1094659
>
> Reduction in number of instruction with the optimization = 542 instruction.
>
> [Patch,opt
,optimization]: Optimized changes in the estimate
register pressure cost.
Earlier the estimate_reg_pressure cost uses the cost of n_new variables that
are generated by the Loop Invariant and IVOPTS. These are not sufficient for
register pressure calculation. The register pressure cost calculation should
13 matches
Mail list logo
